netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC v3 7/8] tun: enable gso over UDP tunnel support.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CACGkMEs9HLYakHZiJbvTv=nWnVhCzPwywh-nB95tTCyAZ65zZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2025 13:34:05 +0800
From: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>, 
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, 
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, 
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>, 
	Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@...hat.com>, 
	Yuri Benditovich <yuri.benditovich@...nix.com>, Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v3 7/8] tun: enable gso over UDP tunnel support.

On Sat, Jun 14, 2025 at 4:04 PM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On 6/12/25 6:55 AM, Jason Wang wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 7:46 PM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
> >> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/if_tun.h b/include/uapi/linux/if_tun.h
> >> index 287cdc81c939..79d53c7a1ebd 100644
> >> --- a/include/uapi/linux/if_tun.h
> >> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/if_tun.h
> >> @@ -93,6 +93,15 @@
> >>  #define TUN_F_USO4     0x20    /* I can handle USO for IPv4 packets */
> >>  #define TUN_F_USO6     0x40    /* I can handle USO for IPv6 packets */
> >>
> >> +/* I can handle TSO/USO for UDP tunneled packets */
> >> +#define TUN_F_UDP_TUNNEL_GSO           0x080
> >> +
> >> +/*
> >> + * I can handle TSO/USO for UDP tunneled packets requiring csum offload for
> >> + * the outer header
> >> + */
> >> +#define TUN_F_UDP_TUNNEL_GSO_CSUM      0x100
> >> +
> >
> > Any reason we don't choose to use 0x40 and 0x60?
>
> I just noticed I forgot to answer this one, I'm sorry.
>
> 0x40 is already in use (for TUN_F_USO6, as you can see above), and 0x60
> is a bitmask, not a single bit. I used the lowest available free bits.

You are right.

Thanks

>
> /P
>